Maybe as a secondary sources?
1 Like
Damn, okay so atleast 15-20 years from now we will know the m1a2 hull so we just got to wait a little for a proper primary source to use with this.
2 Likes
Also this might be interesting, this picture shows the APFSDS and HEAT-FS armor penetration principles
Figure 16 – Principle of kinetic-energy projectile penetration
APFSDS armor penetration principle
The table on the left compares tungsten and depleted uranium penetrators for a 120 mm gun:
Tungsten penetrator
- Mass / density: 3,728 g / 14.5 g/cm³
- Muzzle velocity: 1550 m/s
- Penetration: approximately 660 mm
- Description: during penetration, the tip of the penetrator becomes blunted / deformed.
Depleted uranium penetrator
- Mass / density: 4,911 g / 19.1 g/cm³
- Muzzle velocity: 1680 m/s
- Penetration: approximately 760 mm
- Description: during penetration, depleted uranium exhibits a self-sharpening effect, allowing the penetrator to maintain a sharp tip.
Comparison
- Depleted uranium: +810 g mass, +4.6 g/cm³ density, +100 m/s muzzle velocity, and approximately +100 mm penetration.
Figure 17 – Principle of chemical-energy projectile penetration
HEAT armor penetration principle
The text at the bottom states:
A 120 mm HEAT round can penetrate 660–780 mm of RHA within 2,000 meters.
Source shown under the figures:
Busujima Tōya, The Strongest Tank on Earth! Complete Tracking of the M1 Abrams Tank
Original title: 《地表最強戰車! M1 艾布蘭戰車徹底追蹤》
2 Likes
Will someone compile a bug report based on these sources?
So, since the development team already had access to this information, why didn’t they use it right when the test server first launched, instead of waiting until the test server was about to close and after getting flooded with negative player feedback, before finally releasing a dev log saying they would adopt it? Isn’t that strange?
If you’re so strict about vehicle data in the game, then why do you suddenly become so indifferent when it comes to Russian vehicles?
Keep in mind that right now, Russian vehicles are the only ones in the entire game that lack fire control systems and electronic equipment—anyone who didn’t know better would think Russian tanks are powered by warp energy
3 Likes
It will probably be the first T-Series with a turret basket too
yeah its the rule, anything in the chinese tech tree is required to be nerfered first before any russian equivalents lol
at least the cancer that is the BMPT has it, to be fair that thing is such a laser beam anyways that even without it your losing a barrel or getting lol penned as an Abrams, glad that’s getting fixed completely next update
is this new
1 Like
nah i think most new releases (last 3 updates) that have completely new models not based off another already in game have detailed models including, fcs so it likely would have been there on release similar to things like the stingray, m10booker, and the NASAMS 3 launcher
" The M1A3, a 1990s project. The changes to the hull geometry remained on paper. Source: IMPACT OF LOADING DISTRIBUTION OF ABRAMS SUSPENSION ON TRACK PERFORMANCE AND DURABILITY"
This is NOT where this is sourced from. The original Document has no name but would be named either, “Future Concept- M1A3” or “Armor Improvements M1AX.”
Not only did you not properly source the image you provided, sourcing it to some random load distribution document it never came from, you failed to credit the original uploader.
It comes from an Archive and @kreyton_m1e1 on twitter scanned and shared it, you should probably credit him or remove it and it’s erroneous source claim you made.
7 Likes
wait really lmao, no freakn way
1 Like
its not from @kreyton_m1e1’s twitter & it was posted on the forums in january months before
not saying it isnt from kreyton just its not from the twitter post
Of course its not from the twitter post, it is heavily cropped. It’s from an upload to twitter dating back to early 2025 or from one of his reddit posts.
Here is the file date for it, Jan 3, 2025.
Sorry, but there was a post further up showing that there were mission packages that pushed the tanks weight up to 90 tons.
A mission package may not mean a permanent fixture of equipment, but it sure does mean that it’ll be operating in the field for days or weeks with logistics support.
And if it’s expected to be an option in a combat deployment, since you know the US military planners aren’t idiots, they’ll knoe there’s the possibility of combat scenarios where the vehicle will be unable to quickly access a seevice depot.
So your whole argument undoes itself since you aren’t driving the tank out for 20 minutes and then going back to the depot bro.
Your argument is emotionally driven. Again, army mission planners fully expect and plan for the potential of unplanned extended combat deployments where supply lines and services can and will be disrupted meaning the tank has to be able to endure the useage of its mission packages weight.
Also stop arguing. Just stop. The logic that the army has talked about AND implemented based on paperwork and tanker testimony shows the armor HAS been upgraded.
The issue should be an increase of GBR being raised and abrams moving up.
1 Like
ye scanned them on jan 3rd
This much fuss over not crediting some rando from Twitter.
2 Likes
What Gaijin said is actually plausible if you believe that the US military hasn’t improved its armor efficiency or material tech for 50 years and still relies on basic steel. Gaijin is literally giving the SEPv3 the worst possible defensive stats :D
As we delve deeper into classified modern vehicles, get ready for more “NATO tech can’t be good” from gaijin cuz we got no source to correct them :)
1 Like
But he played thousands of games with the Abrams, even the best players like him can’t maintain such a high WR in their most played vehicles. Renzo is a much better player than me, just look at my stats with the T90M and the T80BVM, i can maintain a high WR too.
@_Renzo hes played ONLY 88 MATCHES in T80BVM… Jesus
While he played THOUSANDS at Abrams, and still light years better than you…
2 Likes